I notice Hillary and others using the term "redeploy" in their plans to end Operation Iraqi Freedom. What's the difference between "redeploy" and cut and run? Did France "redeploy" from Hitler?
2007-06-10 13:50:39 · 11 answers · asked by x 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Why not call a spade a spade?...they can't do it! The leftists, led by Hitlary love to powder and perfume the pig and call it a puppy...cut and run is cut and run...and regarding the French...one would have had to at first deploy to redeploy...How many Frenchman does it take to defend the French mainland?...No one knows, it's never been attempted...Ha!
2007-06-10 15:25:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
cut and run is a 'euphemism' more precisely an exaggeration similar to a hissy fit like a little girl who doesn't want to eat her peas, "it burns wa wa wa"
France was over run, the maginoe line was imovable and hitler walked into paris because the army was gaurding the border. Stupid yes, apparently in the end they surrendered, cutting and running would be if they got the heck out of there. it's not a redeploy either because the troops did not go to fight or station elsewhere.
the difference between cut and run and redeploy are above, redeploy is to go fight elsewhere, cut and run is to flee. The only people who say anything about cutting and running is neocons. Just walk away. It really is a completely different thing. We have no reason to be there just leave. Your pride is intact you don't have to cry because Bush called you a coward. It is not surrender or any ofthese things you wish to suggest.
There is somethig called a dictionary, it explains the meaning of all these words. If you don't know the meaning between retreat, surrender, withdrawl and cease fire then you have no business making milary commentary. I don't care if you were a tool for the man for 36 years.
2007-06-10 21:07:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Now wait a minute, fellow Reagan lover. President Reagan deftly redeployed troops in Lebanon to keep them out of harms way. He put them on alert close by, but didn't leave them in an indefensible position.
The Libs probably just want to do the same thing. They'll probably redeploy the troops to West Virginia, which admittedly will make it harder to call on their services in a timely fashion, but don't Libs always have our best interests at heart?
The whole Global Warming hoax is going to blow up in their faces. Let's just throw them a crumb here.
2007-06-10 20:56:44 · answer #3 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
"Cut and run" is dumb b-western venacular that is virtually meaningless. It's a black and white concept that fails to acknowledge any of the usual complexities or realities.
"Redeploy" in the context that HC is using it...recognises the tactical challenges of successfully pulling out of a war that should never have been started.
2007-06-10 21:04:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
No, cut and run is getting out completely and moving on - just as those with a lot of 'earned' wealth have done with investments at the right time in order to build that wealth.
Knowing when to stop, sell, quit or move on to bigger and better things is an art this administration seems not to have among its repertoire of reactions, eh?!
2007-06-10 20:56:24 · answer #5 · answered by Ben 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I take it that the "others" that you are referring to are the pentagon Generals who said that we should have gotten out of Iraq long ago. maybe you should ask the Generals who advised Bush to do this long ago. And, now we have an idiot president who has already lost Baghdad and Iraq. Perhaps YOU'D like to go over there and fight Iraq's civil war for them.
Please tell us all who the equivelent to Hitler is in Iraq. We and the rest of the world will be waiting for an answer.
2007-06-10 20:58:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Congratulations!
You are smack dab in the middle of the 29% who STILL DO NOT GET IT!
This is not a war that can be won. Our troops are fighting an ideology that does not wear a uniform, nor fight on a specific battlefield.
We're up over 3500 killed now. It's been 4 years. There never was a plan and there's not one now.
Anyone who advocates war should enlist and put their nuts where their mouth is.
But I'm sure you don't lose any sleep knowing that people who are not you are dying daily.
And exposing yourself to liberals is a crime in nearly every state. I'd suggest you keep covered up.
2007-06-10 20:56:01 · answer #7 · answered by Josh 4 · 5⤊ 6⤋
Yes. As is "anti-U.S. insurgent" for "terrorist".
2007-06-10 20:52:53 · answer #8 · answered by me 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋
yep, that's it
2007-06-10 22:57:25 · answer #9 · answered by Son of George Bush 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
its better then the lie and die strategy we have now
2007-06-10 20:54:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋